Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk Vol 50 No 4; Issue 3 http ... · TEACHING SOCIAL WORK VALUES BY MEANS...

Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk 2015:51(1)

Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk Vol 50 No 4; Issue 3

http://socialwork.journals.ac.za/pub doi:http://dx.doi.org/51-3-463

TEACHING SOCIAL WORK VALUES BY MEANS OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONING

Sandra Ferreira, Regardt Ferreira [email protected]

This article provides an outline of the challenging process of teaching, acquiring and internalising social work values, which form an important aspect on which ultimate ethical decision making with clients rests. The supposition is that treating clients impartially, reasonably and justly is dependent on students’ understanding and awareness of their thinking about their thinking. Becoming a strong-sense thinker implies a cultivated disposition of mind without privileging one’s own views and being skilled in the ability to formulate a disciplined line of questioning. The use of Socratic Questioning (SQ) as a form of professional socialisation to teaching professional values may enable students to eventually develop into reflective practitioners.

mailto:[email protected]

500


TEACHING SOCIAL WORK VALUES BY MEANS OF SOCRATIC

QUESTIONING

Sandra Ferreira, Regardt Ferreira

INTRODUCTION

There is an expectation that students will be taught and encouraged to use critical

thinking during the course of their education and in their practice. However, according

to Coleman, Rogers and King (2002), it seems that educators expect or believe that

social work students will develop critical skills as a by-product of the educational

experience. Social work education in South Africa is regulated primarily by policy

documents of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA, 2009, 2010), earlier

regulations for National Standards Bodies (Government Gazette No. 18787, 1998) and

the Standards Generating Body (SGB) of the South African Council for Social Service

Professions (SACSSP, 2004). These policy documents refer to, among other things, the

importance of professional values, and critical thinking and reflection (Government

Gazette No. 30353, 2007). Although exit-level outcomes in social work education do not

specifically require that problems should be identified and solved by using critical and

creative thinking (critical cross-field outcome one) in the case of exit-level outcomes 9

and 10, referring to values of social work and ethical principles, it is expected that

“critical cross-field outcomes … shall be embedded within a standard …provided that

where such standard forms part of a qualification, those critical cross-field outcomes not

included in the standard shall be embedded in the qualification” (Government Gazette

No 18787, 1998: Regulation 7(2)). Nevertheless, the BSW qualification gives a heavy

weighting to the development of practitioners who are critically reflective and able to

practise within the value perspective of the social work profession. The overarching

values that guide social work education and training are social justice and respect for all

(Bachelor of Social Work [BSW)] NQF Level 8) (SAQA, 2009). These values are

embedded within a developmental social welfare services paradigm, thereby fostering a

people-centred approach in both social work education and practice (Patel, Triegaardt &

Ndangwa, 2005; SAQA, 2009).

Consequently social work educators need to include critical thinking in their teaching

strategies to facilitate a process whereby students reflect on their thinking in order to

guide them to become well-cultivated deliberators as they address the wellbeing of

people in their environments. Social work students come to professional education with

their own personal beliefs and values and, as Perlman (1976) stated in the 1970s, “like

every one of us … social work student[s] [are] often quite unconscious of the values that

silently and powerfully guide [their] internal and external behaviour”. This sentiment is

also echoed by Gray and Gibbons (2007:223) in the twenty-first century: “we need to

teach students to reflect on the way in which their reasoning, actions and decisions are

affected by their values”. The rights of students to their personal and cultural beliefs

should be respected, but they should be helped to reason critically about these in order to

understand their influence on their ultimate ethical decision-making.

501


While definitions of beliefs may differ semantically across disciplines, one common

denominator, according to Saleebey (2009), is the claim that beliefs are constructed and

inferred. Personal beliefs are statements, principles or doctrines that people believe to be

true based on evaluation and judgement (Pajares, 1992). Values can be derived from a

set of beliefs in which individuals have an emotional investment (Walsh, 2010) and

which are deemed as important by the individual, for example, the belief that children

are vulnerable, while the value of family life stems from this belief. According to

Hepworth, Rooney, Rooney, Strom-Gottfried and Larsen (2002:8), “[v]alues represent

strongly held beliefs about how the world should be, how people should normally

behave, and about preferred conditions of life”. The profession of social work strives to

nurture and enhance the welfare and wellbeing of client systems. For social workers to

accomplish this, they adhere to a Code of Ethics based on a set of professional values.

These professional values have to be mastered during social work education and one

way of accomplishing this in an intellectually disciplined way might be what Paul and

Elder (2007a) refer to as the development of critical skill abilities by using Socratic

Questioning (SQ). According to them, “all subjects of study are learned, understood and

applied by thinking” (Paul & Elder, 2012:146), thereby fostering “strong-sense critical

thinkers” (Paul & Elder, 2012:2). A striking characteristic of strong-sense critical

thinkers is their consistent pursuit of the fair and just, and acting in the public good (Paul

& Elder, 2012). The same professional action is required from the social worker,

according to values explicated in national and international codes of ethics.

The aim of this article is to provide an outline of the challenging process of the

acquisition and mastering of professional values during social work education, where

critical thinking is an important point of departure in grasping these values. Helping

students to realise the importance of critical thinking or thinking about thinking in

learning, and eventually in ethical decision making, can be facilitated by the utilisation

of Socratic Questioning (SQ), when teaching social work values within an indigenous

context. SQ helps students to go beneath the surface and to establish a powerful voice of

reason. The skill of critical thinking should be cultivated and nurtured consciously

during the education of social work students. It is important, as the ability to formulate,

analyse and assess is a trademark of fair-minded social work students and practitioners.

This article provides a review of the values of social work and explains SQ as a method

of critical thinking for teaching social work values. Furthermore, in this article the

implications for teaching social work values in a South African context are discussed by

means of SQ.

THE VALUES OF SOCIAL WORK IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN CODE OF

ETHICS

Social workers have a professional responsibility and duty to understand ethics and

values, because social work practice contains the potential for the misuse of power,

among other things (Payne & Littlechild, 2000). This misuse might have a negative

impact on human wellbeing and the empowerment of people who are vulnerable,

disadvantaged and impoverished – the same issues and situations the profession is

sanctioned to address in terms of its values. Social work values can be defined as beliefs

502


about what is desirable in the profession and in society or, more specifically, strongly

held beliefs about the rights of people to free choice and opportunity (Hepworth et al.,

2002). These value preferences form the basis for the profession concerning purpose,

direction and action, while ethics refers to “aspects of philosophy concerned with the

principles of right and wrong that guide conduct” (Shardlow, 2009:37).

Social work as a profession grew out of humanitarian and democratic ideals (IFSW, 2000)

and is committed to focusing on social change, problem solving in human relationships and

the liberation of people to enhance wellbeing (Payne, 2006). Core values have been

identified throughout the history of social work as a profession and have been articulated in

the codes of ethics of different countries. Although Pinkerton (2002:99) cautions that

“values are not neat, safe, feel-good phrases, but challenging guides to action within

particular circumstances”, the values of social work continue to be recognised as an

essential ingredient of sound ethical social work practice (Abbott, 2003).

In South Africa social work values, and ethical principles and standards are articulated in a

Code of Ethics by the South African Council for Social Service Professions (SACSSP),

guiding “social workers’ conduct as well as providing guidance with ethical challenges”

(SACSSP, 2004:4). This statutory body regulates the Social Service Professions in terms of

the Social Service Professions Act 110 of 1978, as amended. According to Gray and

Gibbons (2007), values are ideals, whereas ethics guides the individual towards the

achievement of these ideals. Values are not fixed as they are based on beliefs and thus “the

importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into thinking before we accept

ideas as worthy of belief” should be recognised (Paul & Elder, 2012:412). Nonetheless, the

following primary social work values of social development practice form the ideals or

cornerstone of the profession in South Africa. These values are derived from the South

African Constitution, international instruments, and local and international codes of ethics

(Patel, 2005) and should consequently also be subjected to deep questioning, as social work

practice priorities change along with trends in the environment.

Social justice – although a contested and pluralistic concept with no “comprehensive,

indisputable definition of the term” in social work literature, it has taken a prominent place

in the code of ethics for social work (Bonnycastle, 2011:266). This state of affairs

underscores the importance of teaching students to familiarise themselves by explicitly

reflecting upon and locate their own personal understanding of social justice as a system

that “moves society closer to the possibility of social equality” (Bonnycastle, 2011:291).

Working towards the possibility of social equality may imply pursuing social change with,

and on behalf of, vulnerable and disadvantaged populations by upholding and protecting

rights, opportunities, obligations and social benefits for all citizens (Patel, 2005).

Respect for people’s worth, human rights and dignity awareness, humanity (ubuntu) and

sensitivity to diversity by respecting clients’ privacy, confidentiality, self-determination

and autonomy, and being mindful that legal and other obligations may lead to conflict

and inconsistencies in exercising these rights (SACSSP, 2004). Apart from an

individualistic viewpoint of respect for the individual, respect should also include a

structural component. In this way respect for people must, according to Gray and

503


Stofberg (2000:60), be “holistic” and should include “the caring exploration of the other,

involvement with the interrelated networks of relationships which contextualise

individuals” or “the value of interpersonal relationships” (Graham, 1999:258).

Competence should be demonstrated by having the necessary knowledge and skills to

work effectively with people and to strive for high standards of competence (SACSSP,

2004). Competence implies that social workers are ethically bound to conduct

themselves in a trustworthy and accountable manner, adhering to high moral ideals by

promoting honesty in science, teaching and practising the profession with integrity,

which means being aware of one’s own belief system, values, needs and limitations, and

the effect they have on one’s work (SACSSP, 2004).

Professional responsibility – relates to competence and refers to accountability,

transparency, confidentiality and efficiency in relation to client systems, but also to other

groupings such as colleagues, professionals, the profession and society (SACSSP, 2004).

Show care and concern for others’ wellbeing by recognising the importance of human

relationships through not misleading or exploiting human beings during or after

termination of the social work relationship (SACSSP, 2004).

Service delivery should take place by assisting clients by providing help and resources to

address their social needs and problems in order for them to reach their full potential.

Social workers therefore elevate service delivery to others above self-interest (Patel,

2005; SACSSP, 2004).

Although the values of democracy and participation, equality, non-discrimination and

reconciliation as primary values of social development practice are not incorporated into

the social work codes of ethics, they may be implied (Patel, 2005) as they can be seen as

enhancing a just, equitable and democratic welfare dispensation for all people. However,

Allen-Meares and Radin (2000:180) propose the on-going “need for periodic and critical

re-examination” of values.

Teaching social work values by using SQ becomes even more significant when teaching

and practising competently and with integrity requires that social workers should be

aware of their own belief systems and values, and those of others. If this sensitivity

doesn’t exist, one’s values and beliefs are often uncritically used as the unconscious

norm for judgment; this is also called egocentricity (Paul & Elder, 2012).

Sociocentricity, on the other hand, is the belief in the inherent superiority of one’s own

group by judging others from the perspective of one’s own group (Paul & Elder, 2012).

Social workers have to be aware of, and sensitive to, the variations of values and beliefs

across cultures and contexts, and therefore question both their own and their group’s

values and belief systems.

Various levels of values or value systems influence the practice of social work (Drower,

1996; Haynes, 1999; Kirst-Ashman, 2010). Minimally, social work students need to be

aware of the differences, similarities and interplay between professional, personal,

organisational and social values, all of which incorporate ideological beliefs, with the

broader society determining dominant beliefs, values and norms regarding what is

504


acceptable within a particular society. Considering the interchange between these

various levels of values helps students to grasp the idea that all human thoughts and

actions are informed by moral beliefs – beliefs about what is good and bad, right and

wrong – and how they ought to behave or act in particular situations. This, in turn,

contributes to their understanding of professional ethics, which as Saleebey (2009)

notes, are socially and culturally constructed. This means they are contextually or

situationally determined. Hence each country has its own code of ethics which strikes a

balance between the professional values of social work and the particular sociocultural

norms of that country. Within the context of this background knowledge, the Socratic

Questioning method can be used to help students learn how their professional values

mould and shape their actions and behaviours in particular situations. Gray and Webb

(2010) have highlighted how, in today’s neoliberal practice environments, the

appropriate practice of values is more of an accomplishment than we realise. Students

need to learn the complexity of values as their personal values might differ from

dominant sociocultural and political ideologies. The use of SQ can help students to

negotiate their way through complex ethical conundrums and dilemmas.

SOCRATIC QUESTIONING

Socrates (c. 470-399 BC) was a Greek philosopher who believed that the best way to

teach and learn was through disciplined, rigorous questioning. Often using questioning,

he helped people to see either what they said they believed they did not in fact believe

(as their beliefs were inconsistent with their behaviour), or that what they said they

believed was conceptually sound or logical. Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of

critical thinking by carefully questioning common beliefs and explanations,

distinguishing those that are reasonable and logical from those which lack of a solid

rational foundation. This became known as SQ, which can be described as a disciplined

systematic form of questioning (Paul & Elder, 2012). Socratic critical thinking is

consequently a form of critical thinking with the focus, according to Paul and Elder

(2012:438), on “fair-minded, ethical, strong-sense critical thinking.”

The art of SQ is intimately connected with critical thinking, because the art of

questioning is important to excellence of thought, adding systematicity, depth and an

abiding interest in assessing the truth or plausibility of ideas (Paul & Elder, 2007b). By

using SQ, students get the opportunity to develop and test the ideas and beliefs they have

spontaneously formed and those they have learned from caregivers and authorities in

their context (Binker, 1990).

SQ, where critical thinking is used, helps students to probe their thinking to determine

the extent of their knowledge on a given ethical issue and also helps them to analyse

concepts or their line of reasoning concerning the profession’s commitment to ethical

practice. Critical thinking enables the student to question assumptions and to recognise

when it is necessary to question beliefs and actions. Through teaching social work

values by using SQ, students are exposed to the challenge of critical thinking, which can

help them to question not only their own and societal values, but can also aid them in

their own professional development in becoming critically reflective practitioners.

505


Halonen (1995) claims critical thinking in social work has been overworked yet under-

analysed. Critical thinking is that method of thinking about “any subject, content, or

problem – in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skilfully

analysing, assessing and reconstructing it” (Paul & Elder, 2012:xxiv). It furthermore

requires open-mindedness and the ability to formulate (Mumm & Kersting, 1997) and

seek answers to ambiguous and complex problems (Coleman et al., 2002), in order to

ask the next question. In social work critical thinking has been closely related to

critically reflective practice and the notion of the critically reflective practitioner

(Coleman et al., 2002:584). Its goal is to create a level of meta-analysis or thinking

about thinking, a powerful inner voice of reason to monitor, assess and reconstitute

thoughts, feelings, beliefs and actions in a rational direction (Paul & Elder, 2007b). It

implies that most things can be thought through and rational answers can be found to

most questions.

Paul (1990) says SQ deeply probes the meaning, justification or logical strength of a

claim, position or line of reasoning. It can be carried out in a variety of ways and

adapted to many levels of ability and understanding, and is the best-known teaching

strategy for critical thinking. Students should learn the discipline of SQ in order to use it

in reasoning through complex matters, in understanding and assessing the thoughts of

others and in following through the implications of what they and others think (Paul &

Elder, 2007c).

The aim of asking questions by using the Socratic method is to investigate the truth of a

theory or opinion, elicit and develop an idea present in the mind but not yet fully

developed or actualised, lead the enquiry to a logical or valid conclusion, either foreseen

or unforeseen by the questioner, and elicit admission on the part of an opponent of a

statement or conclusion, which can then be examined for truth or falsity (Paul & Elder,

2007b). Accomplishing this aim implies that students have to be encouraged to explicate

and dissect their beliefs and ideas as part of a worldview, that is, a comprehensive

framework of beliefs about reality. It rests on the idea that in order to learn, students

have to be encouraged to question their underlying beliefs with an open mind or to

defend them with rational arguments. Social workers in practice have to be able to give

good reasons for their decisions and actions, and need critically reflective skills to be

able to understand these reasons and explain them to others, especially clients. During

the process of SQ the dialogue is guided by several principles (Binker, 1990; Paul &

Elder, 2009a):

Respond to all answers with a further question that will call upon students to develop

their thinking in a fuller and deeper way;

Seek to understand the ultimate foundations for what is said or believed and follow

the implications of those foundations through further questions;

Treat all assertions as a connecting point to further thoughts;

Treat all thoughts as in need of development (starting with my own thoughts);

Recognise that any thought can only fully exist in a network of connected thoughts –

pursue those connections;

506


Recognise that all questions presuppose prior questions and all thinking presupposes

prior thinking.

When social work teachers demonstrate the above principles and students are

encouraged to integrate “the ability to formulate a line of questioning, to think within

new perspectives and viewpoints, and to uncover biases and distortions”, they are on

their way towards evolving into “strong-sense critical thinkers” (Paul & Elder,

2012:474,475). SQ can therefore be used to help students learn how their professional

values mould and shape their actions and behaviours during ethical decision-making.

SOCRATIC QUESTIONING IN TEACHING PROFESSIONAL VALUES

The Socratic method is a powerful approach to teaching and developing critical thinking

skills, while the acquisition of these skills is also stressed within an African perspective

(Ndofirepi, 2011). This mode of teaching implies that questioning is important to

excellence of thought. Critical thinking provides the conceptual tools for understanding

how the mind functions in its pursuit of meaning and truth, and SQ employs those tools

in framing questions essential to this pursuit (Paul & Elder, 2009b). Critical thinking

enables us to think our way to knowledge (Paul, 2009). It stresses that “[t]thought is the

key to knowledge” (Paul, 1990:xv) and that the “quality of our thinking is given in the

quality of our questions” (Elder & Paul, 2009:2). Therefore students cannot learn or

come to know anything without questioning their thinking systematically, exhaustively

and with breadth of vision (Elder & Paul, 2009).

The area of values implies there is a right way of thinking and believing, and where there is

a conflict – for example, between our personal and professional values – the challenge is to

reason or think ourselves out of our present thinking and into a pattern of thinking that

coheres with professional codes of ethics or value systems. In this learning process we need

others to probe and question our ideas and values in a way that stimulates and challenges us

to think deeply about them. Applying critical thinking skills can help students re-examine

and change their beliefs, if necessary, to fit into their professional value system. It does this

by helping students to be more rational, self-aware, honest and fair in their thoughts and

actions (Paul, 2009). SQ therefore challenges students to profess and explain their

underlying beliefs and values. In this way they learn how their own worldview informs the

way in which they approach situations and problems. Socratic dialogue activities follow a

certain procedure (Pullen-Sansfacon, 2010) of firstly asking well-formulated questions (for

example: what does respect for people’s worth, human rights and dignity awareness,

humanity (ubuntu) and sensitivity to diversity mean within a social work context?). Below

are examples of more questions that can be asked to promote critical thinking during class

discussions when teaching social work values.

507


TABLE 1

UTILISATION OF ELEMENTS OF THOUGHT TO ASK SOCRATIC

QUESTIONS

ELEMENTS FOR INTEL-

LECTUAL ENGAGEMENT

EXAMPLES OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONS TO HELP

STUDENTS BE CRITICALLY ENGAGED

Recognise that all thought

reflects a purpose and the

purpose is to expose the logic of

thought.

What is the main purpose of personal, ideological and

societal values?

What is the central purpose or goal of studying values in

social work?

Recognise that all thought is

responsive to a question.

What kinds of questions are raised when social services

are rendered to different target systems in society?

How do you implement social justice, human dignity and

other social work values in addressing the social problem?

Recognise that no thought is

fully understood until the

background information (facts,

data and experiences) that

supports or informs it is clear.

What information am I using or do I need to come to a

conclusion regarding the specific social work values(s) as

it applies to addressing the social issue at hand?

Is the information relevant to the issue?

Is the information evidence based?


requires the making of

inferences, the drawing of

conclusions and the creation of

meaning.

How did I reach this conclusion?

Is there another way to interpret this specific social work

value?

Should we call into question any of the inferences that

were made?

Recognise that no thought can

be fully understood until one

understands the concepts and

ideas that define and shape it.

What is a value? What is meant by a social work value?

What are the most basic main ideas, concepts or theories

of social work and for social work?

Can I explain this idea, concept or theory on which this

value is based?

Recognise that all thought rests

upon other thoughts, which are

taken for granted or assumed.

What are the assumptions I am using in my thinking about

social work values?

What can we safely assume as we reason through this

social work value?

What assumption has led me to this conclusion?


begins somewhere (in

assumptions) and goes

somewhere (has implications).

What am I implying with this specific social work value?

What are the consequences of my stance in what I am

implying with the specific social work value?

What are the consequences for the practice and

implementation of social work values within a specific

theory?

Recognise that no thought can

be fully understood until one

understands the point of view

that places it on an intellectual

map.

Which point of view am I utilising to look at social work

values?

Is there another point of view I should consider?

What worldview is upheld by the client system(s)?

What is the agency’s point of view?

(Adapted from Elder and Paul, 2007; Paul and Elder, 2009b)

508


Secondly, examples experienced by participants have to be collected in which the given

topic plays a role; one example is chosen by the students, which will usually be the basis

of the analysis and reasoning throughout the discussion; crucial statements are written

down on a flip chart; counter-examples are used to attempt to find inconsistencies in the

discourse and finally participants strive to reach consensus (Pullen-Sansfacon, 2010).

When students are challenged to think about their values, they have to think for a

purpose from a particular point of view based on assumptions which, in turn, determine

the decisions they make and their consequences. They use their existing knowledge,

ideas and theories to interpret the situation before them and their understanding of it. In

so doing they gather and assess data, facts and information in their effort to answer a

question or solve a problem (Paul & Elder, 2007d). Therefore, any discussion or any

thinking about social work values guided by SQ is structured to help students to move

from the obscure to the clear, from the unreasoned to the reasoned, or from the

unexamined to the examined. It is a path to knowledge or knowing what to do in a

particular situation. It helps students to understand the influence of their personal values

on their professional behaviours and ethical decisions.

IMPLICATIONS AND DISCUSSION

Teaching social work values is not merely taking in and giving back masses of detail, as

this might make students believe that they know a lot, while they lack rudimentary

critical thinking skills. Didactic learning is a “product-oriented approach” (Ndofirepi,

2011:241) and dependent on memory and recall as students come up with “canned

answers”, because this is what is expected from them often in the name of so-called

critical thinking (Paul, 1990:xvii; Paul & Elder, 2012). Gibbons and Gray (2004:21)

state that both teachers and students should be engaged in critical thinking by means of

“critical talk, dialogue and engagement” about personal, societal, ideological and

professional values.

Teaching social values should never be a mere flow of information from teacher to

student, or a top-down “mug-and-jug” model of education, where students are filled

from the teacher’s jug of knowledge (Rolfe, Freshwater & Jasper, 2001), which might

eventually lead to what Thompson (2009) calls “mindless practice”. The utilisation of

critical thinking has practical relevance for the student, as it increases intellectual

independence, increases tolerance of different points of view, and frees one from the

snares of dogmatism (Murray & Kujundzic, 2005). If a critical thinking stance is applied

in which values are made explicit, social work is in a stronger position to ensure practice

is consistent with those embraced values and that there is no discrepancy between what

the profession claims as the ethical basis of practice and what social workers actually do

in reality (Thompson, 2009).

Social work educators have the primary responsibility in modelling critical thinking and

therefore it should form part of their classroom pedagogy. Teaching what critical

thinking is about and how it can be applied to the content of the learning material on

social work values by means of SQ becomes the point of departure for them. Teaching

by means of SQ and teaching the skill of SQ can help students to question, firstly, what

509


they know and understand about their own beliefs and personal values and social work

values and, secondly, their own beliefs and values and social work values. They need to

be helped to maintain a healthy sense of scepticism in reaction to their own values and

also to professional values. According to Paul (1995), SQ will enhance students’ ability

to become more practised at understanding why they believe what they believe. SQ will

increase students’ awareness of the need to be clear, accurate and relevant in the

examination of issues and discussions of these issues with others. Most importantly, they

will begin to think critically in all areas of their life, examining the claims, evidence,

assumptions, conclusions, implications and consequences of ideas, issues and actions.

A substantive conception of critical thinking will enable students to think within the

content (Elder, 2010) of the social work values they have to learn. However, she warns

against a simplistic approach to develop the mind such as a “1-2-3 step” problem-

solving strategy or an approach that cannot be applied to a full range of real-life

problems and issues. Students can be taught to ask relevant questions about personal,

professional, ideological and societal values, for example, to clarify thinking; they can

be asked to elaborate a point or exemplify it. Gibbons and Gray (2004) recommend that

teachers need to encourage students to unearth and challenge assumptions, while

theories and approaches should be analysed and questioned. To foster reasonability in

thought, they can be asked whether there is a more logical interpretation of the data;

encouraging fairness requires them to ask whether they have considered all relevant

viewpoints in good faith (Elder, 2010). According to Coleman et al. (2002), skills in

critical thinking are essential for social workers, as clients need to be assured that service

delivery is based on the best evidence, knowledge and practices in a given situation.

Paul and Elder (2012:475) go so far as to state that strong-sense critical thinkers “strive

always to be ethical”, because they have the ability and propensity to change their

thinking when the evidence would require it.

The quality of our lives and that of what we produce, make or build depends on the

quality of our thought. Thinking is a complex phenomenon, routinely highlighted,

discussed and critiqued in every relationship, in every family, in every business and

organisation, in every field and discipline, and in every part of culture (Elder &

Cosgrove, 2009). Critical thinkers understand the value of taking their thinking apart

(Paul & Elder, 2012). The necessity for critical thinking becomes even more apparent as

social workers are often the embodiment of sound reasoning in the lives of clients.

Social work education should enable the student to be skilled in breaking down reading,

writing, speaking, reasoning and listening regarding social work values using the

elements of critical thinking. Teaching social work values by means of SQ helps the

student to move through the process of critical thinking development – moving from

being an unreflective thinker to becoming an accomplished thinker, where intellectual

skills and virtues have become second nature in their lives. If we want a critical society

in social work, fostering critical thinking concerning social work values may be a good

starting point.

510


Embracing the cultivation of critical thinking in students has to be followed up by tying

assessment to critical thinking (Paul, 2009) about social work values. The following

questions can guide the educator: How do I assess students’ learning to think their way

through their personal, societal, ideological and professional values? How do I assess the

extent to which they are learning to reason within different cultural groups’ values and

viewpoints? Designing and conducting Socratic discussions in class using the concepts

and principles of critical thinking is a starting point in the continuous assessment of

students in social work.

Social work is a value-laden profession which is articulated in codes of practice, codes

of conduct, and codes of ethics, which variously assist and guide social workers’

practice. Congress (2006) states that the most effective way of teaching ethics and

human rights in social work implies integrating ethics content into all courses, as well as

presenting separate ethics courses. She underlines the necessity of including national

codes of ethics, as well as international codes on ethics and human rights in the

curriculum. Critical thinking as an outcome should therefore form part of every exit-

level outcome in social work training, from BSW to doctoral level. Elder (2010) is of the

opinion that faculty members often mistakenly assume that they need only a few handy

critical thinking strategies to boost their teaching. Becoming effective educators in

teaching social work values means to work your way methodically through the theory of

critical thinking and apply it not only in class but also in life.

CONCLUSION

Coming from different backgrounds with different worldviews, social work students

should be urged by educators to be aware of, and sensitive to, the ways in which their

value preferences continuously influence and pervade the process of acquiring

professional values. Mere verbal recalling and agreement on professional values alone

will not necessarily enable the social work student to accomplish a reflective stance on

the influence of personal, societal and ideological values on professional values.

Acquiring and mastering of social work values during education and training require a

form of professional socialisation where the mastering of critical thinking is an

important point of departure in grasping these values.

The utilisation of SQ in framing questions in teaching professional values helps students

to become aware of own belief systems underlying their personal, ideological and

societal values and the influence of these on social work values. Reflecting on students’

underlying beliefs is an integrative process driven by critical thinking, as it enables

students to develop as independent thinkers concerned with mindful and ethical practice.

Critical thinking in fostering professional values for ethical decision-making is the

cornerstone of sound practice.

In order to make this practicable in teaching, firstly, educators in social work should get

training themselves on what critical thinking and the art of SQ is; secondly, teach

students the underlying principles of critical thinking and the art of SQ; and thirdly,

make sure that course outcomes are formulated to mirror critical thinking as part of the

social work students’ training in professional values. Lastly, educators should ensure

511


that teaching takes place in accordance with these outcomes. The utilisation of SQ

therefore supports the social work value of integrity, namely being aware of one’s own

belief systems and values as an important point of departure for acquiring social work

values. Acquiring these values is essential, as it forms the basis on which the eventual

ethical decision-making for professional action rests when interacting with client

systems within a diverse society.

Social work educators have the responsibility to help social work students understand

and espouse the values of the profession, not merely by having them recite the values of

social work, but also to enable them to discuss, review, debate and eventually practise

within an ever-changing context. Integrity as a social work value requires that the social

workers should be aware of their own belief systems and values and their effect on

service rendering. One way of doing this is by means of SQ.

REFERENCES

ABBOTT, A.A. 2003. A confirmatory analysis of the professional opinion scale: a

values assessment instrument. Research on Social Work Practice, 13(5):641-666.

ALLEN-MEARES, P. & RADIN, N. 2000. Our professional values and the changing

environment. Social Work Education, 36(2):179-182.

BINKER, A.J.A. 1990. Socratic questioning. In: PAUL, R. & BINKER, A.J.A. (ed)

Critical thinking – what every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world.

Rohnert Park, CA: Sonoma State University, Center for Critical Thinking and Moral

Critique, 269-298.

BONNYCASTLE, C.R. 2011. Social justice along a continuum: a relational illustrative

model. Social Service Review, 85(2):266-295.

COLEMAN, H., ROGERS, G. & KING, J. 2002. Using portfolios to stimulate critical

thinking in social work education. Social Work Education, 21(5):583-595.

CONGRESS, E.P. 2006. Teaching social work values, ethics and human rights. In:

Social work: making a world of difference: Social Work around the World IV.

Berne, Switzerland: International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 1-16.

DROWER, S.J. 1996. Social work values, professional unity, and the South African

context. Social Work, 41(2):138-146.

ELDER, L. 2010. Achieving critical mass. Times Higher Education. [Online]

Available: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode

=41435 [Accessed: 01/04/2011].

ELDER, L. & COSGROVE, R. 2009. Critical societies- thoughts from the past:

critical thinking, the educated mind, and the creation of critical societies. Dillon

Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

ELDER, L. & PAUL, R. 2007. The miniature guide to taking charge of the human

mind. Thinking, feeling, wanting. Based on critical thinking concepts and principles.

Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode%20=41435

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode%20=41435

512


ELDER, L. & PAUL, R. 2009. The art of asking essential questions (4th ed). Dillon

Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

GIBBONS, J. & GRAY, M. 2004. Critical thinking as integral to social work practice.

Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 24(1/2):19-38.

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE NO. 18787 of 28 March. 1998. Regulations under the

South African Qualifications Authority Act, 1995. Schedule. Pretoria: Government

Printer.

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE NO. 30353 of 5 October. 2007. Higher Education Act 101

of 1997. The Higher Education Qualifications Framework. Pretoria: Government

Printer.

GRAHAM, M.J. 1999. The African-centred worldview: developing a paradigm for

social work. British Journal for Social Work, 29(2):251-267.

GRAY, M. & GIBBONS, J. 2007. There are no such answers, only choices: teaching

ethical decision making in Social Work. Australian Social Work, 60(2):222-238.

GRAY, M. & STOFBERG, J.A. 2000. Social work and respect for persons. Australian

Journal of Social Work, 53(3):55-61.

GRAY, M. & WEBB, S.A. 2010. Introduction: ethics and value perspectives in social

work. In: GRAY, M. & WEBB, S.A. (eds) Ethics and value perspectives in social

work. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 1-18.

HALONEN, J. 1995. Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology,

22(1):75-81.

HAYNES, D.T. 1999. A theoretical integrative framework for teaching professional

social work values. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(1):39-50.

HEPWORTH, D.H., ROONEY, R.H., ROONEY, G.D., STROM-GOTTFRIED, K. &

LARSEN, J. 2002. Direct social work practice – theory and skills (6th ed). Pacific

Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

IFSW (International Federation of Social Work). 2000. Definition of Social Work.

[Online] Available: www.ifsw.org/f38000138.html? [Accessed: 11/04/2011].

KIRST-ASHMAN, K.K. 2010. Introduction to social work and social welfare –

critical thinking perspectives (3rd

ed). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

MUMM, A.M. & KERSTING, R.C. 1997. Teaching critical thinking in social work

practice. Journal of Social Work Education, (1):75-84.

MURRAY, M. & KUJUNDZIC, N. 2005. Critical reflection: a textbook for critical

thinking. Montreal and Kingston, London: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

NDOFIREPI, A.P. 2011. Philosophy for children: the quest for an African perspective.

South African Journal of Education, 31(2):246-256.

PAJARES, M.F. 1992. Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy

construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3):307-333.

http://www.ifsw.org/f38000138.html

513


PATEL, L. 2005. Social development practice model. In: PATEL, L. (ed) Social

welfare and social development in South Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford

University Press Southern Africa, 202-233.

PATEL, L., TRIEGAARDT, J. & NDANGWA, N. 2005. Developmental social welfare

services. In: PATEL, L. (ed) Social welfare and social development in South Africa.

Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press Southern Africa, 154-200.

PAUL, R. 1990. Introduction. In: PAUL, R. & BINKER, A.J.A. (ed) Critical thinking:

what every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Rohnert Park, CA:

Sonoma State University, Center for Critical and Morale Critique, xv-xx.

PAUL, R. 1995. Critical thinking: how to prepare students for a rapidly changing

world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. 2009. Critical thinking: where to begin. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for

Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2007a. A guide for educators to critical thinking

competency standards: standards, principles, performance indicators and

outcomes with a critical thinking master rubric. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation

for Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2007b. The art of Socratic questioning: based on critical

thinking concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2007c. Educational fads: how to get beyond educational

glitz and glitter. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2007d. The thinker’s guide for students on how to study

and learn a discipline using critical thinking concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA:

The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2009a. The role of Socratic questioning in thinking,

teaching and learning. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking. [Online]

Available: http://www.criticalthinking.org/page.cfm?PageID=522&CategoryID=71

[Accessed: 30/11/2010].

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2009b. Understanding the foundation of ethical reasoning.

Based on critical thinking concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation of

Critical Thinking.

PAUL, R. & ELDER, L. 2012. Critical thinking – tools for taking charge of your

learning and your life (3rd

ed). Boston, MA: Pearson.

PAYNE, M. 2006. What is professional social work? (2nd

ed). Bristol: Policy Press.

PAYNE, H. & LITTLECHILD, B. 2000. Ethical practice and the abuse of power in

social responsibility. London: Jessica Kingsley.

PERLMAN, H.H. 1976. Believing and doing: values in social work education. Social

Casework, 57(6):381-390.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/page.cfm?PageID=522&CategoryID=71

514


PINKERTON, J. 2002. Child protection. In: ADAMS, R., DOMINELLI, L. & PAYNE,

M. (eds) Critical practice in social work. Basington, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan,

96-105.

PULLEN-SANSFACON, A. 2010. Virtue ethics for social work: a new pedagogy for

practical reasoning. Social Work Education, 29(4):402-415.

ROLFE, G., FRESHWATER, D. & JASPER, M. 2001. Critical reflection for nursing

and the helping professions. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.

SALEEBEY, D. 2009. The strengths perspective in social work practice (5th ed).

Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

SACSSP (South African Council of Social Service Professions). 2004. Policy

Guidelines for Course of Conduct, Code of Ethics and the Rules for Social Worker.

[Online] Available: www.sacssp.co.za/UserFiles/File/SACSSP%20Code%20Ethics.pdf

[Accessed: 22/11/2010].

SAQA (South African Qualifications Authority). 2009. Registered Qualification: BSW

NQF level 08. [Online] Available: http://regqs.saqa.org.za/viewQualification. php?id=

23994; http://regqs.saqa.org.za/viewQualification.php?id=58582

[Accessed: 15/02/2014].

SAQA (South African Qualifications Authority). 2010. Level Descriptors for the

South African National Qualifications Framework. [Online] Available: http://regqs.

saqa.org.za/viewQualification.php?id=23994 [Accessed: 02/08/2014].

SHARDLOW, S.M. 2009. Values, ethics and social work. In: ADAMS, R.,

DOMINELLI, L. & PAYNE, M. (eds) Social work themes, issues and critical debates

(3rd

ed). Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan, 37-48.

SOUTH AFRICA. 1978. Social Service Professions Act 110 of 1978. Pretoria:

Government Printer.

THOMPSON, N. 2009. Practising social work: meeting the professional challenge.

Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.

WALSH, T. 2010. The solution-focused helper: ethics and practice in health and

social care. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Open University Press.

Dr Sandra Berna Ferreira, Department of Social Work, University of the Free

State, Bloemfontein, South Africa; Dr Regardt Jacobus Ferreira., Tulane School

of Social Work, Tulane University, New Orleans, United States of America.

http://www.sacssp.co.za/UserFiles/File/SACSSP%20Code%20Ethics.pdf

http://regqs.saqa.org.za/viewQualification.%20php?id=%2023994

http://regqs.saqa.org.za/viewQualification.%20php?id=%2023994

http://regqs.saqa.org.za/viewQualification.php?%20id=58582

Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk Vol 50 No 4; Issue 3 http ... · TEACHING SOCIAL WORK VALUES BY MEANS...

Documents

Transcript of Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk Vol 50 No 4; Issue 3 http ... · TEACHING SOCIAL WORK VALUES BY MEANS...